Sri Lanka’s Fight to Save the Peace

Feb. 21, 2014

Regarding “Holding Sri Lanka to account” (Editorial, Feb. 4): Your call for accountability for what happened during Sri Lanka’s tragic 30-year conflict with terrorism represents a narrow focus on a complex reality. For peace to take hold, one must tread carefully to establish the conditions for successful reconciliation in more areas than justice alone. Much has been done in the war-affected regions to remove mines, resettle displaced persons, repair damage to infrastructure and re-establish social services.

Sri Lanka is calm and steps are being taken to stabilize the country and seek reconciliation. But this is a two-way street, and some elements of the Tamil body politic seem intent on seeking international punishment for the government of Sri Lanka, which at the same time is being criticized for not moving fast enough on reconciliation with the Tamils.

A premature and interventionist effort to seek justice will put these hard-fought gains at risk. Sri Lanka cannot be expected to allow an investigation into the conduct of its forces alone, and only during the last few weeks of the war. One needs to look at the totality of the war, including the atrocities committed by the Tamil Tigers. Following the war, the government granted amnesty to more than 11,000 former Tamil Tigers, some of whom had committed grave crimes. To open an investigation would cause them great anxiety and may cause some of them to revert to arms.

The process of healing has just started, and it is in our interest to complete it at our own pace in a sustainable manner.

JALIYA WICKRAMASURIYA, Washington

The writer is the Sri Lankan ambassador to the United States.

Sri Lanka faced a conventional war against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, who were determined to establish a separate state. Several peace talks failed and the very existence of the nation was at stake. Furthermore, the brutality of the Tigers was unsurpassed. They pioneered suicide bombers, which had deadly effects against the civilian population. They almost annihilated the country’s democratic machinery. So it is unfair to focus, as this editorial does, on a few weeks of a prolonged war and to propose resolutions demanding an international inquiry. What’s needed instead is a more concerted effort to strengthen the hard-won peace.

Kosala Jayasinghe, Galle, Sri Lanka

While your editorial implies that crime and human rights violations during Sri Lanka’s civil war were committed solely by the government, evidence by the United Nations shows otherwise. And since reconciliation is the objective, what purpose would there be in further investigations that would not only fail to yield conclusive results but would exacerbate the polarization of the communities?

Neville Ladduwahetty Colombo, Sri Lanka

Fair trials promote the rule of law

Regarding “Courts can’t end civil wars” (Opinion, Feb. 6) by Thabo Mbeki and Mahmood Mamdani: This piece is premised on the assumption that political reform and trials are mutually exclusive. But prosecutions have never been a cure-all. Experience has shown in countries like the Democratic Republic of Congo and Ivory Coast that a lack of justice too often fuels renewed abuses while fair, credible trials promote respect for rule of law. Indeed, the lack of justice for grave crimes during Sudan’s civil war appears to have contributed to South Sudan’s current crisis, where our researchers have documented widespread killings, looting, unlawful detention and massive displacement.

Yes, some African leaders have attacked the International Criminal Court. But even the African Union has endorsed justice for the South Sudan atrocities, deciding in December to create a commission of inquiry to investigate and make recommendations on accountability.

Times have changed from the era when amnesties for atrocities were a regular response to conflicts. For victims in South Sudan, the rest of Africa and beyond, that is an important step forward.

Elise Keppler, NEW YORK

The writer is the associate director of the International Justice Program at Human Rights Watch.

Hey, cousin, have you got a match?

Regarding “Are you my cousin?” (Review, Feb. 1): One can only hope that A.J. Jacobs’s support of a technologically generated global family tree is tongue in cheek. Like other traditional family researchers, I do seek out online family information that might fill in blanks or, even if not entirely accurate, give me leads. But people who post trees not even remotely close to verifiable on legitimate genealogy sites send me into tailspins. This latest brainstorm of letting a computer program decide who matches who compounds idiocies a gazillion-fold. Just think, if the criteria used to “match” relatives was something like, “You have a sibling AND you were born in a year ending in a ‘6’ AND you like dogs,” Queen Elizabeth II could claim me as a distant cousin. This being the case, Mr. Jacob, let me know if she’ll be coming to your planned reunion. I’ll definitely need to buy something new to wear.